Eric Schmidt selling nearly half of his Google stock

Summary: Google’s executive chairman is selling off a considerable portion of his Google stock portfolio — and some voting power.

Rachel King

By Rachel King for Between the Lines | February 8, 2013 — 23:46 GMT (15:46 PST)



Google‘s executive chairman Eric Schmidt is selling off nearly half of his stock in the Internet giant.

The news came about on Friday afternoon through a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

According to the document, Schmidt owned roughly 7.6 million shares of Class A and Class B common stock, which represented about 2.3 percent of Google’s outstanding capital stock and 8.2 percent of the voting power of Google’s outstanding capital stock.

The former CEO is now planning to sell up to approximately 3.2 million shares of Class A common stock. That reduces his share in the Mountain View, Calif.-based corporation by approximately 42 percent.

Here’s a snippet from the 8-K filing about Schmidt’s (and Google’s) explanation for the move:

The pre-arranged trading plan was adopted in order to allow Eric to sell a portion of his Google stock as part of his long-term strategy for individual asset diversification and liquidity. The stock transactions pursuant to this trading plan will be disclosed publicly through Form 4 and Form 144 filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Using this trading plan, Eric can diversify his investment portfolio and can spread stock trades out over a period of one year to reduce market impact.

Soon after the news broke, Google shares were down — albeit slightly — in after hours trading:


Screenshot via MarketWatch

Topics: Google, Tech Industry

Rachel King



9 February, 2013 00:45

  • Reply 5 Votes

    • anonymous … nice now

      It was Loverock Davidson who purchased all that stock.

      Enough Said

      9 February, 2013 04:13

      Reply 1 Vote

      • Loverock Davidson?

        that guy from under the bridge? who gave him money?


        9 February, 2013 05:04

        Reply 4 Votes

        • Better than the others, though

          Yeah? Google stood up for us against SOPA, while Msoft, Facebook, and Apple hid out and said to hell with Internet freedom.

          James Mooney

          12 February, 2013 01:52

          Reply 1 Vote

          • Google Stand’s

            Yes, the above fact is correct, as you are right on target.


            12 February, 2013 01:57

            Reply Vote

    • Why everyone is so ticked off with this move?…

      The man holds a nice chunk of potential change (do the math, even at $700 a share…). Why won’t he cash some of this. What the sense in waiting any longer? What the point to wait for it to get even more rich in value?
      Let him be…


      12 February, 2013 01:26

      Reply Vote

      • total money

        Doing the math suggests that he’s going to walk away with about $2.4 billion by the time he’s done. Does he want it in small unmarked bills, do you suppose? Is he just going to rent a helicopter and drop it all out $20 at a time while circling over Silicon Valley? The world wonders.


        12 February, 2013 01:54

        Reply Vote

        • Diversification.

          It’s diversification of his portfolio. It is a bad investment strategy to have too much of your wealth tied to a single company or business sector. He is probably looking to a future retirement/philanthropic pursuit and so the voting power in Google is no longer as important to him as making sure his wealth is protected. It makes total sense.


          12 February, 2013 02:59

          Reply Vote

    • I guess you just cant win.

      As things currently seem to stand…there are always a number of people who think something in the IT industry sucks. Plenty enough that they are not afraid to say it and plenty enough to give rise to the notion that if we were to put any faith in the idea that posters on these boards were credible, that pretty much everything sucks.
      Apple sucks, Microsoft sucks, Linux sucks, Google sucks, Facebook sucks, Intel sucks, it all sucks. It seems likely that even many of the writers here suck and a great number of the posters here suck. It all sucks.
      It all sucks so much it almost makes one recollect the old saying that where everything is a priority, nothing is a priority. Maybe where everything sucks nothing sucks. At least not nearly so much as far too many people around here seem to be dying to let people know how badly it all sucks.
      While I can understand anyone’s personal tastes, if properly explained, how they may not care for some particular thing, it makes one wonder how so many can feel one thing or another “sucks” when there always seems to be quite a number of people, often large and vocal groups who feel it dosnt suck.
      I would hope that sooner or later at least some of the writers around here would get the message that there is seldom much credibility that can be attached to an opinion article that amounts to “It sucks” even if the words “it sucks” are merely implied if never actually used.


      12 February, 2013 02:36

      Reply Vote

      • Linux doesn’t suck!

        Linux is open source, and therefore unable to suck. It’s not possible. Any suckyness that may arise is addressed by the community unlike proprietary softwares that keep code secrets and profit on ignorance.
        Linux for President, Linux for humanity!
        Linux FTW!


        12 February, 2013 03:36

        Reply Vote

        • Right on, well, money

          Linux is a result of a ‘we have a community’ approach and it’s so bad that it can’t do pretty much anything. Can’t even suck. Totally useless.


          12 February, 2013 06:30

          Reply Vote

  • The clown

    The clown who screwed-up Novell and Sun… Now that Google share prices are at its high, its good time for this clown to take his money and run…Google has no long term future and would at some point get exterminated by Microsoft


    9 February, 2013 13:15

    Reply 5 Votes

    • Maybe Eric Schmidt read these?

      Maybe he know something that many are starting to suspect

      Challenger R/T

      9 February, 2013 15:45

      Reply 4 Votes

      • You’re anticipating global trust…

        …that "Siri" – or whatever mobile app – won’t ever lie…that mobile apps won’t ever be corrupted by – be a reflection of the corruption of – a corporate or government entity that is far more interested in mushrooming you in order to steer you down a particular path towards a particular purchase, vote, or behavior than it is in providing you with the truth.
        That is the great fallacy of mobile…the twin assumptions that humans are cattle and their herders are and always will be trustworthy.
        lolll…me, I’ll never let a single-source, single point-of-control app drive. I at least hope that I am not alone.


        12 February, 2013 01:24

        Reply Vote

      • Dubious Sources

        Given that Apple wanted to destroy Google I don’t know if Mac News is a reliable source ;’) As for Forbes (besides the idiot editorials from Steve that they are forced to print) they thought Credit Default Swaps were a grand idea before the crash of 2008 ;’)

        James Mooney

        12 February, 2013 02:02

        Reply Vote

      • Interesting article Challenger R/T…but…

        …its totally packed with a lot of very speculative guess work.
        Its like so so much of the predictive articles we see right here on ZDNet.
        You have to be very very careful about predicting the end of any company in five years that is still doing very well and has no direct indicators of failure written anyplace on the wall.
        Its true, you can predict future potential problems, you can predict potential future twists and turns in the IT world that may take place, you can then predict a particular company failing to adapt to those changes, you can then begin to predict the demise of that company and predict it could eventually fail entirely.
        But wow.
        Is there like some kind of big prize, or award or something they give out for an IT writer who makes the most far flung predictions of a products or companies demise? The practice seems to run rampant throughout the world of IT writing.


        12 February, 2013 02:53

        Reply Vote

    • Amazing! Something we agree on, NZ!

      Except for the "getting exterminated by Microsoft" part.


      9 February, 2013 18:26

      Reply 1 Vote

    • Bullcrap!

      it is MS which is under attacks and with its failures on Windows phone ,RT and 8 went into complete defense and Google is the one attacking it, this attack will get worse when we hear more about Chromebooks, the one that is in danger is MS not Google!


      9 February, 2013 19:56

      Reply 1 Vote

      • all wrong

        Truth is, that both Microsoft and Google are in danger. They have put too much of their eggs in the same basket.
        But, Microsoft has more stable business — so if one of both survives, that will not be Google.


        10 February, 2013 13:33

        Reply 4 Votes

The problem with you prediction is simple:

Windows phone ,RT and 8 are not failures. And then they have their server business their XBox, development tools and a whole lot of other things they sell. And chromebooks are not something that will grow to any big percentage of the market so that’s not too big an issue.

Challenger R/T

10 February, 2013 18:49


Friday, April 13, 2012

Loverock Davidson: A study in idiot fanboyism

For the past ten years or so I have been on ZDNet’s page in one way, shape or form, posting my thoughts, doing my fair share of arguing with people over Unix, Linux, Microsoft, and Apple…but one topic always stands out and that is the topic of one Loverock Davidson, or as I like to put it, the biggest idiot that ever walked the face of IT.

Basically Loverock’s logic flows like so:

1.  Microsoft can do no wrong, everyone else is garbage
2.  When in doubt, refer to number 1.

This is how it has been for the past ten years, around and around in circles, and I am going to out this individual for the incompetent idiot he is.

Loverock Davidson…an Internet moron for the ages.

Here’s a little example:

October 6, 2010, Ubuntu 10.10 debuts…a reader posts how excited they are about being able to use it…Loverock comments:

You’re excited that you have to back up, download, burn, partition, format, and load your OS every 6 months? No thanks, that is too much of a hassle for me, and I’m sure its the same the rest of the world doesn’t use it either.

A response, exposing Loverock’s TOTAL lack of IT knowlege:

You sir, should stop drinking the `Redmond brand` Kool-Aid!!

What in hell are you talking about. Backing up, and re-formatting. That sort of s— is what you have to do with Windows^H^HZE every 6 to 8 months.

On this lowly H^HDell, I have Karmic, Lucid and the beta of Maverick all happily co-existing with out clobbering each other. I have all of my music and video files available from within any one of those installs, as well as my Firefox 4 betas and nightlies. How did I do it?? You might ask!!

It is called `multi-booting`, a bit tricky at first, but once you get the concept down, not that hard.  

Another response:

The Bla bla bla the rest of the world doesnt use it neither . …. Moronic Luddite , unable to think by it self must follow the idiotic pack. As a tech / consultant you must know them ALL solaris ,unix,linux,mac os x ,os2 ,as 400 and the list goes on …. i really wanna see you with a client ” oh your backup database is in Unix sorry i only do Windows ” and get you @ss kick so hard that you tooth filling give up ……….

Your a joke same as your pilot skill, yours book you supposedly have written . you comment on linux that you have tried back in 1992.

your a pollutant here and should be wash off man people like you should not have the right to speak and vote  

Why does ZDNet continue to put up with his crap unless he’s on the payroll?? 


  1. I really think that Loverock Davidson is the same type of poster as Mike Cox.

    Mike Cox and his "rep" comments were so off-the-wall unbelievable that it was fairly obvious to those who had seen his stuff before that he was purely tongue-in-cheek. He’d get a few bits from those that had never seen his stuff before and the rest of us enjoyed the humour.

    Loverock Davidson’s comments are not near as funny as Mike Cox and his style seems to be more serious than Mike Cox – serious enough that he snags more comments. If you ask me, I think that is the goal of Loverock Davidson – to up the comments count of the article writer. So much so that he always follows up with additional inflammatory comments.

    He sounds convincing enough that a lot more fall for his rhetoric. Anyone in the industry that reads his banter recognizes it immediately as someone who is out of touch with reality at worst, aware of what he’s doing for fun at best.

  2. Sounds familiar Loverock Davidson is probably the same person as Flatfish and his 100’s of nyms on Usenet. He has been posting his tripe up there for 16 years.

AnonymousJanuary 11, 2013 at 7:16 PM

I think Loverock-Davidson and toddbottom7 are some employee of ZDNet. E.g Could be SJVN himself (sorry SJ). If everyone preaches only about Linux on post, it makes the post and conversation a bit Linux centric. I think they are juice to the whole discussion. Its funny, but everytime I visit ZDNet posts (specially about Linux), I have been habitual to search for these two names. I thank both for being so humorous.

Two or three posts you get really mad when you see such comments, but once you go through some more posts, it makes sense.

  • Toddbottom7 = Cyberslammer. You didn’t know this?

  • Advertisements

    About this entry